PowerSwitch

News reports suggest that subsidies for new grid tied PV installations are likely to end next May.
Existing installations will not be affected.

I have mixed feelings about this.

Arguments for keeping the subsidy.
Reduced carbon emissions if compared to fuel burning.
Increased energy security, every GWH generated thus is less reliance on imported natural gas.
If EVs become popular, then more grid tied PV will offset the daytime charging of these.
As the climate warms, demand for air conditioning will increase, and PV could offset the extra electricity needed.

Arguments for ending the subsidy.
There are many other calls on public money.
The capital cost of PV is falling and it MAY be viable without subsidy.
There is a limit as to how much PV the grid can absorb, and we don't want to risk exceeding this.

Ending the Feed In Tariff is one thing, but the proposal is to also remove the export tariff - any electricity fed back by grid tied solar panels to the national grid would receive zero payment. Solar PV would then be subsidising the electricity companies.

This would kill off simple grid tied PV installations completely, although it would be a big boost to domestic battery storage systems.

It would make solar PV on new build even less attractive to building companies.

Ending the subsidy is petty but unsurprising given general trends in governance.

Other forms of energy receive humungous subsidies, mustn't let them suffer!

PS_RalphW wrote:
......any electricity fed back by grid tied solar panels to the national grid would receive zero payment. Solar PV would then be subsidising the electricity companies.

Seriously though you can't just keep on adding more and more solar PV export for ever and ever ......

And today, PV has been the single largest input to the grid for some hours.
Pv has been over 6GW for some hours, with nuclear, gas, and wind each being below 6GW.